part of me thinks that on some level, the fact that literally all of the top guys were also cheating makes it a level playing field and makes his wins at least a small part legit., he also did great things with his fame. So yeah, he cheated, but I don't think he's the devil people are making him out to be.

Plus I have a hard time getting upset over a sport I have no interest in

He's a buttbake who raised money for good. Life's full of nonlinear things that don't need to be congruent. When the subject of the donations comes up, yay. When the subject of his cheating and amazing capacity for sustained lying comes up, then a fart in his face.

I'm ambivalent about Armstrong. My dad died a couple months ago after having cancer for 10 years, and I know Armstrong's story and the whole Livestrong "movement" were of tremendous help to my dad psychologically. I can imagine that many other cancer patients were inspired by Armstrong too. For this reason, I'm kind of disappointed that the whole Armstrong image is being destroyed.

On the other hand, he did cheat, repeatedly lie about it, and I've heard that while Livestrong has raised a ton of money for cancer research, they're one of those charities that doesn't do the best job of devoting the maximum percentage of donations to the cause they're supporting.

Gaucho wrote:I think it's a sad position. To borrow a line from EPP: What happend to people being responsible for their own actions?

I spent a year involved with professional motor racing in this country, and have friends that have gone on to work with pro teams in the big four sports in this country (football, hockey, baseball and basketball). The notion that athletes don't cheat or that cheaters are the exception is almost quaint to me. It's like "Aw, how cute...... 'fair play'....."

I don't make a value judgment, it is what it is. So I generally don't get up in arms over cheaters that much, provided they simply acknowledge their cheatery ways when caught. That's why this fuss over Armstrong is so bemusing to me; he was never caught, so I don't care how huffy he ever got.

tifosi77 wrote:I spent a year involved with professional motor racing in this country, and have friends that have gone on to work with pro teams in the big four sports in this country (football, hockey, baseball and basketball). The notion that athletes don't cheat or that cheaters are the exception is almost quaint to me. It's like "Aw, how cute...... 'fair play'....."

I remember an article years ago in either Car and Driver or Road & Track that discussed the difference between cheating and cheatin’ in auto racing. Cheating is flagrant rule violations. Cheatin’ is taking the rules and finding any loopholes you can exploit. For example, years ago the Trans-Am series required the race cars to run car bodies as they came from the factory. But the rules didn't say anything about dipping car bodies in acid to remove metal and make them lighter, which is what the Penske team did. Smokey Yunick was famous for figuring out ways to add extra fuel capacity to his NASCAR racers. For example, NASCAR specified how big a fuel tank could be, but Yunick noticed the rules didn’t say anything about fuel lines, so he created a two-inch diameter fuel line that was 11 feet long and held five extra gallons of gas. I also remember a story that NASCAR’s tech inspectors once went over one of his cars and drained every single drop of fuel out of everything they could see. Satisfied that the car wasn’t carrying any extra gas, they turned it back over. Yunick hopped in, started it up, and drove the “bone dry” car back to the garage.

tifosi77 wrote:I spent a year involved with professional motor racing in this country, and have friends that have gone on to work with pro teams in the big four sports in this country (football, hockey, baseball and basketball). The notion that athletes don't cheat or that cheaters are the exception is almost quaint to me. It's like "Aw, how cute...... 'fair play'....."

I remember an article years ago in either Car and Driver or Road & Track that discussed the difference between cheating and cheatin’ in auto racing. Cheating is flagrant rule violations. Cheatin’ is taking the rules and finding any loopholes you can exploit. For example, years ago the Trans-Am series required the race cars to run car bodies as they came from the factory. But the rules didn't say anything about dipping car bodies in acid to remove metal and make them lighter, which is what the Penske team did. Smokey Yunick was famous for figuring out ways to add extra fuel capacity to his NASCAR racers. For example, NASCAR specified how big a fuel tank could be, but Yunick noticed the rules didn’t say anything about fuel lines, so he created a two-inch diameter fuel line that was 11 feet long and held five extra gallons of gas. I also remember a story that NASCAR’s tech inspectors once went over one of his cars and drained every single drop of fuel out of everything they could see. Satisfied that the car wasn’t carrying any extra gas, they turned it back over. Yunick hopped in, started it up, and drove the “bone dry” car back to the garage.

The athlete's job is to cheat. The governing body's job is to catch them. That's how it works.

He never tested positive. Not saying he didn't dope, but the governing body didn't do their job well enough and LA made them out to be fools.

I don't approve, but I can understand the desire to go as far as possible to gain the edge over the competition.

I would even understand the lying, even though the grandstanding (tweeting himself with 7 TDF yellow jerseys) is rather tasteless.

Where Armstrong loses completely my support is the fact that over the years, despite the fact that he doped like there was no tomorrow, he himself as well as his possy tried to destroy lives and livelihoods of people who disclosed any info about Armstrong's doping - or even just testified against his doctor. I honestly think some of his behavior was criminal (this interview with Betsy Andreu describes some of those instances: http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/i-tea ... -1.1238932). Just for what he did to those people, he deserves a massive kick in the ball.

tifosi77 wrote:I spent a year involved with professional motor racing in this country, and have friends that have gone on to work with pro teams in the big four sports in this country (football, hockey, baseball and basketball). The notion that athletes don't cheat or that cheaters are the exception is almost quaint to me. It's like "Aw, how cute...... 'fair play'....."

I remember an article years ago in either Car and Driver or Road & Track that discussed the difference between cheating and cheatin’ in auto racing. Cheating is flagrant rule violations. Cheatin’ is taking the rules and finding any loopholes you can exploit. For example, years ago the Trans-Am series required the race cars to run car bodies as they came from the factory. But the rules didn't say anything about dipping car bodies in acid to remove metal and make them lighter, which is what the Penske team did. Smokey Yunick was famous for figuring out ways to add extra fuel capacity to his NASCAR racers. For example, NASCAR specified how big a fuel tank could be, but Yunick noticed the rules didn’t say anything about fuel lines, so he created a two-inch diameter fuel line that was 11 feet long and held five extra gallons of gas. I also remember a story that NASCAR’s tech inspectors once went over one of his cars and drained every single drop of fuel out of everything they could see. Satisfied that the car wasn’t carrying any extra gas, they turned it back over. Yunick hopped in, started it up, and drove the “bone dry” car back to the garage.

Honestly, as I was typing that I was thinking "Shyster might be the only reglar here who gets what I'm saying without further explanation."

In terms of enforcement, there is a world of difference between 'spirit of the law' or 'intent', and what's actually written in the rule books. In sport, the latter is the only thing that matters. But on a philosophical/emotional level, if you know what a specific rule is meant to prohibit but you find a way within the verbiage of that rule to accomplish that very thing.... well, to me that's cheating. It might not be punishable as such, but you know as the perpetrator that you are doing something the rule makers don't want you to do..... and to me, that's clearly cheating.

Trust me...... I grew up as a Ferrari Formula 1 fan. I know from parsing words in rule interpretation.